Sorry to bang on about this guy but he really is out of control.
In his column yesterday Martin Samuels wasted half of it by painstakingly explaining that when things happen and time passes the things that have happened become history no matter what those things are. Right. With me?
The object of his philosophy lesson was a throwaway remark made weeks ago by Liverpool’s Javier Mascherano. The remark in question being that Liverpool as a football club had more history attached to it than Manchester City and as such Javier Mascherano would rather play for Liverpool. Not the most newsworthy stuff I know but hey, this is Martin Samuels we’re talking about.
He himself even says later in the column that Manchester City has never even tried to buy Mascherano and so the Argentine midfielder’s point is moot. May I ask therefore why he feels the need to waste his entire column addressing the point? Never mind, for now let us go on.
Mr Samuels then proceeds to state that Manchester City do indeed have a history by explaining that in order to have a history a club must simply have existed for longer than....well, it must simply have existed. I think sir, and this is just an opinion, that Javier Mascherano meant that Liverpool had a more successful history than Manchester City.
No matter because according to the column past success means nothing and in order to justify his point that City have history and success in unimportant Samuels goes on to list all the success that City managed to achieve (specific competitions won etc) prior to Liverpool. Confused? Me too.
The rest of the article is taken up with a 1,000,000 word run down of the games played and points achieved equation for all of the contenders for the fourth Champions League place. A 30 second glance at the table tells you this but again this is Martin Samuels and being arrogant and patronising are seemingly his raison d’être.
And he hasn’t finished yet. We are then treated to a discussion of Barcelona because they are a) interested in signing Mascherano and b) recently used as a reference point for beautiful and entertaining football by Liverpool manager Rafael Benitez following Liverpool’s League win over Blackburn.
Samuels then states that Benitez can’t think that Liverpool and Barcelona are playing at the same level this season as if he did he would have used his own side to reference high quality football. Again not exactly sure why this is relevant as Barcelona is one of the most illustrious football clubs in the world with a history of success to rival any in global sport but as we know, Martin Samuels thinks that this is largely irrelevant. The confusion intensifies.
Now I’m no Alan Hansen but it seems to me that if the rest of the world can see that Liverpool, and pretty much every other club on the face of the planet, aren’t at the same level as Barcelona then why would Rafael Benitez be any different? The Liverpool manager may be having a nightmare of a season but he hasn’t lost his mind just yet. I’m not so sure this is true when applied to the journalist under discussion.
It really is as bizarre an article as it is pointless. I honestly don’t know what he is trying to say, prove or achieve other than conducting a personal vendetta to belittle Javier Mascherano and/or Liverpool. Again.
It is probably also worth remembering that Liverpool are the most successful club in the history of British football in terms of major trophies – 18 League titles (something which Man Utd have only just equalled) and 5 European Cups.
So Mr Samuels I ask you; what is your point?
It’s not as if the Chief Sports Writer (!) of a major national newspaper didn’t have anything else to write about this week. How about Beckham’s return to Old Trafford? Or Kevin Pietersen’s continued batting difficulties and England’s fast bowling injury crisis? Or how about the recent developments in what promises to be a truly great Formula 1 season? Tiger back practising on the golf course ahead of a possible return to competitive action at the Masters? Horrific problems with British tennis in the wake of the disastrous Davis Cup loss to Lithuania?
No. Instead let’s have an entire column, and 5 minutes of my and many other lives, wasted by analysing a harmless and innocuous comment made by down heartened player two weeks before. Hmmm. Someone should tell Martin Samuels that the shunning of fact, reason, objectivity and impartiality should be left to the front pages of the Mail.
I mean, imagine wasting time by writing about this....